MATHURA COURT ADMIST PLEA TO REMOVE MOSQUE ADJACENT TO KRISHNA JANMBHOOMI
Local court in Mathura on Friday admitted a plea that seeks to remove a mosque adjacent to the Krishna Janmabhoomi. The court of District Judge Sadhna Rani Thakur has fixed November 18 as the next date of hearing in the case. Earlier, a civil court in Mathura had dismissed the plea seeking an order to remove the Shahi Idgah mosque. In her September 30 order, Judge Chhaya Sharma had said that Lord Krishna had countless devotees but if each devotee was allowed to file a suit like this, it would jeopardise the judicial and social system. Hari Shankar Jain, the lawyer for the petitioners, said Judge Thakur observed that in case the trustees were not approaching the court, the devotees could.He maintained the Place of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 did not apply to the case.The suit is filed by Lucknow-based advocate Ranjana Agnihotri and seven others on behalf of the child deity Bhagwan Shri Krishna Virajman. The U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board and the Committee of Management of Trust of Shahi Idgah have been arraigned as defendants in the suit, along with Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi Trust, Mathura, and Shri Krishna Janma Sthan Seva Sansthan.The suit seeks cancellation of the decree passed in July 1973 by Civil Judge, Mathura, and recovery of 13.37 acres of land situated within the area of temple.
Credit: Priya
Recent Posts
See AllIssue Whether the petitioners are entitled to grant of bail as per Section 167(2) r/w Section 36A(4) of the NDPS Act because of non-completion of the investigation? Observation The Court cited the fol
A prosecutrix of a sex offence cannot be put on par with an accomplice. She is in fact a victim of the crime. The Evidence Act nowhere says that her evidence cannot be accepted unless it is corroborat
Right to cross-examination vested in the petitioner could not be closed on absence of his council rather in that situation court have provide legal aid council to the accused.As seen in the recent cas